"then she is inside the Black Zero and will be responsible for pulling Superman out of those skulls." I'm pretty sure the skulls are in a dream sequence, not a Kryptonian deathtrap. However, I do think she and Clark will wind up in the ship, preferably with her first. That way he'd be flying in to save her, AND stop the demolition.

I can almost see it now, Supes flies around inside dodging plasma blasts from Foara (and yes, I do want him to fight her before taking on the big kahuna). When he grabs her wrist wrestles the gun out of her hand. They start exchanging blows, but she eventually gets the upper hand. She clinches Superman's chin, but is hit from behind by a shot fired by Lois, and passes out. He check's Foara's pulse, and says something witty while Lois responds with something also witty. Superman goes further in the ship, trying to find a way to disable the black Zero ship. Lane keeps guard with the gun, but curiosity gets the better of her, and she starts exploring the ship.

After months of lurking I finally joined this forum. Hope you are all welcoming to a new Superman lover ready to share!

Quote:

I won't be. You really think people will go from the movies to comic book shops and then complain to DC about not having Lois with Clark? It's not going to happen anytime soon. There are just as many SMWW shippers as Clois shippers.

It's really alot more complex than that. It's not about people complaining to comic book shops it's about having product synergy for branding. Something that DC Comics is very, very poor at. And not just with Superman. They struggle with it with many characters.

First of all, no there are not as many Superman/Wonder Woman shippers as Lois/Clark shippers. It's just not even close. Lois and Clark are not just one of the most famous relationships in comics, they are one of the most famous fictional relationships in the world. They wind up on lists next to Romeo and Juliet and Robin Hood and Maid Marian. Depending on your generation, you may have your own favorite "version" of them but their reach is far and wide. Even in stories where Superman/WW wind up together, 99% of the time it's because Superman has been married to Lois first and then lost her. Even in the current comics it's been put out there that Superman believes Lois is "unavailable" to him and so he turned to Diana. She's always the second choice.

In the comics community, the Superman/Wonder Woman relationship has been extremely controversial and it's extremely unpopular in alot of circles and for very good reason. Because it damages the characters. It's extremely unpopular amongst most of the female-centered bloggers. And it's not just unpopular in Superman circles....it's unpopular amongst Wonder Woman fans. The relationship has degraded both Lois Lane and Wonder Woman in various respects and continues to do terrible things to Wonder Woman's branding. It sets Wonder Woman up like a sex object and a male gaze object to men and negates almost all that WW was supposed to stand for as the lead in her own story and the alpha in her own world. DC wanted it to be controversial and wanted people to talk. The real issue will be if people stop being angry and just start not caring. Which is happening.

Almost every writer who has strong ties to Wonder Woman including Greg Rucka, Gail Simone, Jiminez and others have come out against the relationship. Simone has a ton of influence and she is heavily, heavily devoted to Lois and Clark.

The Lois/Clark fandom on places like tumblr numbers the thousands. The fanboards for shows like "Lois and Clark: The New Adventures of Superman" that aired 20 years ago still have active members.

When DCWomenkickingass did her annual couples' tournament, Lois and Clark got more nominations than any other couple and they won the tournament. Superman and Wonder Woman didn't even get enough nominations in the tournament to make the cut. The tournament was open to everyone and DCwoman encouraged any fans of Superman/WW to nominate the couple. A few did. But the interest in fandom just wasn't there. You didn't have to register. It was all totally fair and there was no cheating. DCWoman has about 8,000 twitter followers so there were alot of people who participated.

The bottom line is that there are alot of women in comics fandom who are not just fans of Lois or Diana but fans of them both. And the people who are fans of them both just have no tolerance for this new status quo that pits them against each other and guts both women in the process.

Editorial at DC Comics has it in for Lois Lane right now. That's not a secret. The problems behind the scenes in the Superman offices are well known. Several Superman writers have walked off the book bc they didn't agree. But that's the leadership. It doesn't reflect the actual fandom.

Quote:

The closest thing is Andy Diggle having Lois and Clark working as field reporters in June's Action Comics, but he said he's not going to make them be together. The same goes for Batman/Superman and Superman Unchained that also come out in June. Those stories are set so I don't see how it could happen.

The writers didn't make any of these decisions. There is a (stupid) editorial mandate at DC Comics right now that forbids Lois and Clark from being together. It came from Dan Didio and Jim Lee. This is well known. They are the ones pushing the Superman/WW thing and it's been extremely controversial at DC Comics behind the scenes. The Superman/WW thing was designed as a stunt because they thought the stunt might help sales. It didn't. And I'll get to that in a second.

Diggle found a way around it by setting his story in the past. They won't be together because editorial says they can't. That's all it is. And that can change in the flash of an instant under new leadership.

The Superman/WW stunt was designed as a stunt from the start. But it's been a failed stunt. It didn't bring in any new readers or if it did not enough to replace the ones that it drove away. The cover of JL #12 with the kiss that was all over the news and marketed sold to collectors. But that was it. The sales dropped on the Justice League book by the next issue even lower than they had before the stunt. The sales continued to drop.

The Superman titles are not doing well. The Superman book itself is barely holding on to 50K which considering the money put into the reboot to change Superman is not good. Action Comics has dropped significantly and will most likely drop more after Morrison leaves. The Wonder Woman title is under 40K which is very bad for her and worrisome.

The Snyder/Lee book and Superman/Batman book will sell well because of Snyder's name and the Bat connection. But the Superman/WW stunt was not the sales success they hoped it would be.

What will happen in the future of comics will depend on the leadership. The current leadership is toxic and they have driven several writers off the Superbooks already with the editorial control issues.

Yes, the current comics are set. But these things go in circles. The story will always return to Lois. Lois and clark will always circle each other and they will alway wind up in each other's orbits. It may not be today or tomorrow. But it will happen. Diana will go back to her own story where she belongs and editors who don't treat Lois like crap will come into play at DC. It all goes in a circle.

In the meantime, sad as it may seem, what happens in the comics means very little long term these days as the comics readership is so small compared to the media properties. The media properties are what matter and it's where the money is. The media properties decide the future of these stories for decades to come. Not the comics.

After months of lurking I finally joined this forum. Hope you are all welcoming to a new Superman lover ready to share!

It's really alot more complex than that. It's not about people complaining to comic book shops it's about having product synergy for branding. Something that DC Comics is very, very poor at. And not just with Superman. They struggle with it with many characters.

First of all, no there are not as many Superman/Wonder Woman shippers as Lois/Clark shippers. It's just not even close. Lois and Clark are not just one of the most famous relationships in comics, they are one of the most famous fictional relationships in the world. They wind up on lists next to Romeo and Juliet and Robin Hood and Maid Marian. Depending on your generation, you may have your own favorite "version" of them but their reach is far and wide. Even in stories where Superman/WW wind up together, 99% of the time it's because Superman has been married to Lois first and then lost her. Even in the current comics it's been put out there that Superman believes Lois is "unavailable" to him and so he turned to Diana. She's always the second choice.

In the comics community, the Superman/Wonder Woman relationship has been extremely controversial and it's extremely unpopular in alot of circles and for very good reason. Because it damages the characters. It's extremely unpopular amongst most of the female-centered bloggers. And it's not just unpopular in Superman circles....it's unpopular amongst Wonder Woman fans. The relationship has degraded both Lois Lane and Wonder Woman in various respects and continues to do terrible things to Wonder Woman's branding. It sets Wonder Woman up like a sex object and a male gaze object to men and negates almost all that WW was supposed to stand for as the lead in her own story and the alpha in her own world. DC wanted it to be controversial and wanted people to talk. The real issue will be if people stop being angry and just start not caring. Which is happening.

Almost every writer who has strong ties to Wonder Woman including Greg Rucka, Gail Simone, Jiminez and others have come out against the relationship. Simone has a ton of influence and she is heavily, heavily devoted to Lois and Clark.

The Lois/Clark fandom on places like tumblr numbers the thousands. The fanboards for shows like "Lois and Clark: The New Adventures of Superman" that aired 20 years ago still have active members.

When DCWomenkickingass did her annual couples' tournament, Lois and Clark got more nominations than any other couple and they won the tournament. Superman and Wonder Woman didn't even get enough nominations in the tournament to make the cut. The tournament was open to everyone and DCwoman encouraged any fans of Superman/WW to nominate the couple. A few did. But the interest in fandom just wasn't there. You didn't have to register. It was all totally fair and there was no cheating. DCWoman has about 8,000 twitter followers so there were alot of people who participated.

The bottom line is that there are alot of women in comics fandom who are not just fans of Lois or Diana but fans of them both. And the people who are fans of them both just have no tolerance for this new status quo that pits them against each other and guts both women in the process.

Editorial at DC Comics has it in for Lois Lane right now. That's not a secret. The problems behind the scenes in the Superman offices are well known. Several Superman writers have walked off the book bc they didn't agree. But that's the leadership. It doesn't reflect the actual fandom.

The writers didn't make any of these decisions. There is a (stupid) editorial mandate at DC Comics right now that forbids Lois and Clark from being together. It came from Dan Didio and Jim Lee. This is well known. They are the ones pushing the Superman/WW thing and it's been extremely controversial at DC Comics behind the scenes. The Superman/WW thing was designed as a stunt because they thought the stunt might help sales. It didn't. And I'll get to that in a second.

Diggle found a way around it by setting his story in the past. They won't be together because editorial says they can't. That's all it is. And that can change in the flash of an instant under new leadership.

The Superman/WW stunt was designed as a stunt from the start. But it's been a failed stunt. It didn't bring in any new readers or if it did not enough to replace the ones that it drove away. The cover of JL #12 with the kiss that was all over the news and marketed sold to collectors. But that was it. The sales dropped on the Justice League book by the next issue even lower than they had before the stunt. The sales continued to drop.

The Superman titles are not doing well. The Superman book itself is barely holding on to 50K which considering the money put into the reboot to change Superman is not good. Action Comics has dropped significantly and will most likely drop more after Morrison leaves. The Wonder Woman title is under 40K which is very bad for her and worrisome.

The Snyder/Lee book and Superman/Batman book will sell well because of Snyder's name and the Bat connection. But the Superman/WW stunt was not the sales success they hoped it would be.

What will happen in the future of comics will depend on the leadership. The current leadership is toxic and they have driven several writers off the Superbooks already with the editorial control issues.

Yes, the current comics are set. But these things go in circles. The story will always return to Lois. Lois and clark will always circle each other and they will alway wind up in each other's orbits. It may not be today or tomorrow. But it will happen. Diana will go back to her own story where she belongs and editors who don't treat Lois like crap will come into play at DC. It all goes in a circle.

In the meantime, sad as it may seem, what happens in the comics means very little long term these days as the comics readership is so small compared to the media properties. The media properties are what matter and it's where the money is. The media properties decide the future of these stories for decades to come. Not the comics.

I was thinking, I wonder if Lois' portrayal in this movie is supposed to show how much of a 'normal woman' Lois is. As in, while they will probably be portraying her as strong, that she is seen as a normal very hardworking woman. Perhaps they are doing this in order to highlight the contrast with the more superpowered women like Farora. Superman could be with a woman of his own race and perhaps that could be shown. Unlike Smallville which portrayed Lois as very strong, an almost robust energy everywhere she went. Perhaps they weren't going for that per se, but more just honing in on the idea that she is a normal human woman.

This post makes ZERO sense.

Lois is a human, flawed woman. That's the entire point of her character and btw it's a point that Smallville emphasized as well.

In fact, if you paid attention to Smallville you should know full well that Erica Durance's Lois Lane was often very vocal about the fact that she viewed herself as a "flawed" human and that was a huge part of who she was. She wasn't portrayed as the "perfect" Princess like Lana was nor as some kind of cyber genuis like Chloe was. Her power and strength gave from her steel will and her heart and the fact that she had a true heart for justice and her job. That's the whole point of Lois.

Lois is the human personification that the "ordinary" can be "extraordinary." Everything about her is SUPPOSED to represent a human with flaws but with the capacity for greatness in just being who she is. That is EXACTLY how Smallville and Erica Durance approached it. They NEVER portrayed her as anything else because to do so would have been not in line with the whole POINT of who Lois is and why she is Clark's soulmate.

Quote:

Plus there''s the idea that Superman isn't even with Lois in the comics, he's with Wonder Woman.

So what? The Superman/WW relationship is a stunt. It doesn't change the fact that Lois and Clark's romantic history spans 75 years. Lois and Clark were married in some capacity in the books for over 30 years and I would venture that eventually they will be married again. These stories go in cycles. A stupid stunt (because yes it's stupid) in comic books that reach a very small audience each month has nothing to do with the 75 year history of an iconic figure on film.

Quote:

Perhaps the movie's might be keeping up with the comics in showing while Lois IS a strong woman, she is not quite on his level.

That's not what the comics have shown AT ALL nor has that been the message of the Superman mythos for the last 75 years. It's a narrow definition of what it means to be someone's equal and full of troubling shallow assumptions about power and gender.

The current comics are playing out a (stupid) storyline of forced drama in which Clark believes that he can't be with Lois and Wonder Woman believes that she can't be with the man she loved (Steve Trevor) and they therefore turn to each other because they are sad and lonely. But it's a problem with a solution. It's not that Lois "isn't on his level" is that Clark is a coward who has never found the courage to be honest with Lois about how he really feels. It's a stalling mechanism for drama.

"Not quite on his level." Honestly, that's an offensive and horrible message and if that actually winds up being the message of the comics it will be a complete creative failure.

Strength is not defined by the power of your fists but the power of your soul. Love is not based on such shallow means and if it is...then it's not real love. I anticipate that, at some point, the takeaway for both Superman and WW is going to be that they can't live "above" humanity and allow fear to make their choices for them. They have to find the courage to face their fears as opposed to running away from them.

Quote:

I don't know, at least I'm getting that vibe from this movie what with the heavy emphasis on Krytonians. Then there was the rumor that Wonder Woman would be in the movie...

There are just as many human hero figures in this movie (Lois, Jonathan, Martha, Perry, Jimmy etc.) as there are Krypontians so where do you get this false idea from? I imagine the film is going to BALANCE the human and the super. Which is the whole point.

The rumor about Wonder Woman was started by fans and spread by fans who would like it to be so. She is not in the movie. I would bet money on that.

Quote:

But nothing against Lois, I'm sure she'll be portrayed as strong. But I don't think as robust and energetic as Erica Durance's Lois though. Her Lois seemed every bit as strong as all the other super women on the show.

You have not even seen Amy Adams SPEAK on film yet and you got this from where? Not to mention...."other super women" on the show with Smallville...again....huh? That makes no sense...AGAIN. Lois was a human amongst alot of humans on the show. The only regular female character with powers was Kara.

Yes, Lois and Clark were equals on Smallville just as they were on "Lois and Clark" just as they were in the comics. But not because of some stupid or arbitrary idea of what it means to be "robust" (which is really subjective btw) but because she had a strong SOUL and a heart for justice. There is nothing saying that Lois and Clark in this movie can't have the same kind of equality.

You run into alot of problems when you try to define a woman being on a man's level due to shallow, stereotypical standards. The whole point of Lois is she is supposed to re-define this idea. Are you trying to imply that women have to be taller or have certain physical characteristics that YOU set in a subjective way in order to quality as someone's equal? Because that's a bunch of BS. Weird post.

Has this angle of Lois looking for a mysterious man before she meets and knows Clark played out in any of the comics? Trying to see how it will fit in. You would think it would make it even harder to conceal his identity as Clark later on, lending weight to the theory she might know who he is from quite early on.

Not sure if someone has answered your question yet. I'm a bit new here.

In Superman: Birthright, we learn in the beginning that Lois had already been to Africa first following the same leads as Clark. Clark was aware of her and she was aware of him. When Lois and Clark meet, Lois is surprised by how shy Clark is because she he came across as so strong and assertive in his writing.

The great part about this is that it's a situation for Lois and Clark discover each other FIRST through each other's writing and talent before they even meet.

I've always thought it would be a good thing to play with if they were to ever make another film and I'm so glad they seem to be going that route for this movie.

I also think it's worth mentioning that I think people need to keep perspective about expectations about the "rushed" nature of a love story.

Lois and Clark are in a unique position as a fictional couple. The public knows who they are and we've watched them fall in love many times already in various media properties---and many of those courting periods were very drawn out.

We just watched Clark and Lois circle each other for years on Smallville before finally being commited. They circled each other for 2 years on "Lois and Clark." They circled each other on the animated series until there was finally confirmation in the finale that Supes/Lois were going to be a "couple" of sorts. They circled each other in the comics for years before they were married etc.

Now, don't get me wrong. I LOVED the journey of Lois and Clark on Smallville. It was a slow burn that was painful at times but was totally worth it in the end. But I also know going in that a 2 hour movie going into a trilogy does not have time to do that kind of slow burn. They just don't.

At this point, I'm actually ok with the movies moving the relationship along at a quicker speed because frankly, I'm ready to actually see them together with the secret out in the open. I'm ready to get to that part and frankly, I think the public is too. The iconic nature of this relationship puts it in a unique spot in that it may be to the narrative's benefit to spend more time with them actually together and explore THAT angle going forward and all the drama that comes with it then to do a slow burn with a couple that everyone knows is going to eventually fall in love and be together.

What I'm saying is....you have to think about expectations before you get worked up at this idea of a "weak" love story and think about what that really means. Did this person go into the movie thinking that Lois wouldn't learn Clark's secret for a while? If so, then Lois learning the secret early might seem "rushed" to that person. Whereas, i'd welcome that with open arms because I'm ready and willing to get to that part of the story and just run with it.

A 2 1/2 hour movie is never going to be able to develop the Lois/Clark love story with the same detail that a TV show that ran 10 years can. It's just not possible. You are talking about 6 hours total for a possible trilogy vs. 222 hours for a 10 year TV show. And that's really ok.

All I really require from this movie to be happy with the Lois/Clark element is seeing first hand how Lois operates as a reporter and as a voice for justice, seeing Lois reach out to Superman as that voice for justice and that human link in times of turmoil, seeing Superman as this beacon of hope and good for Lois in a world where she doesn't always FINd that kind of compassion in other men. If get some variation on that...I really don't care how early she learns the secret or how quickly they are together. I won't consider it "weak" or "rushed" because this is 75 year old story and some of this, at this point, becomes short hand. I'd rather get on to the two of them having adventures together and blow precious time in a trilogy trying to do a slow burn when there just isn't enough TIME to do that. Just my opinion.

Not sure if someone has answered your question yet. I'm a bit new here.

In Superman: Birthright, we learn in the beginning that Lois had already been to Africa first following the same leads as Clark. Clark was aware of her and she was aware of him. When Lois and Clark meet, Lois is surprised by how shy Clark is because she he came across as so strong and assertive in his writing.

The great part about this is that it's a situation for Lois and Clark discover each other FIRST through each other's writing and talent before they even meet.

I've always thought it would be a good thing to play with if they were to ever make another film and I'm so glad they seem to be going that route for this movie.

I also think it's worth mentioning that I think people need to keep perspective about expectations about the "rushed" nature of a love story.

Lois and Clark are in a unique position as a fictional couple. The public knows who they are and we've watched them fall in love many times already in various media properties---and many of those courting periods were very drawn out.

We just watched Clark and Lois circle each other for years on Smallville before finally being commited. They circled each other for 2 years on "Lois and Clark." They circled each other on the animated series until there was finally confirmation in the finale that Supes/Lois were going to be a "couple" of sorts. They circled each other in the comics for years before they were married etc.

Now, don't get me wrong. I LOVED the journey of Lois and Clark on Smallville. It was a slow burn that was painful at times but was totally worth it in the end. But I also know going in that a 2 hour movie going into a trilogy does not have time to do that kind of slow burn. They just don't.

At this point, I'm actually ok with the movies moving the relationship along at a quicker speed because frankly, I'm ready to actually see them together with the secret out in the open. I'm ready to get to that part and frankly, I think the public is too. The iconic nature of this relationship puts it in a unique spot in that it may be to the narrative's benefit to spend more time with them actually together and explore THAT angle going forward and all the drama that comes with it then to do a slow burn with a couple that everyone knows is going to eventually fall in love and be together.

What I'm saying is....you have to think about expectations before you get worked up at this idea of a "weak" love story and think about what that really means. Did this person go into the movie thinking that Lois wouldn't learn Clark's secret for a while? If so, then Lois learning the secret early might seem "rushed" to that person. Whereas, i'd welcome that with open arms because I'm ready and willing to get to that part of the story and just run with it.

A 2 1/2 hour movie is never going to be able to develop the Lois/Clark love story with the same detail that a TV show that ran 10 years can. It's just not possible. You are talking about 6 hours total for a possible trilogy vs. 222 hours for a 10 year TV show. And that's really ok.

All I really require from this movie to be happy with the Lois/Clark element is seeing first hand how Lois operates as a reporter and as a voice for justice, seeing Lois reach out to Superman as that voice for justice and that human link in times of turmoil, seeing Superman as this beacon of hope and good for Lois in a world where she doesn't always FINd that kind of compassion in other men. If get some variation on that...I really don't care how early she learns the secret or how quickly they are together. I won't consider it "weak" or "rushed" because this is 75 year old story and some of this, at this point, becomes short hand. I'd rather get on to the two of them having adventures together and blow precious time in a trilogy trying to do a slow burn when there just isn't enough TIME to do that. Just my opinion.

Not sure if someone has answered your question yet. I'm a bit new here.

In Superman: Birthright, we learn in the beginning that Lois had already been to Africa first following the same leads as Clark. Clark was aware of her and she was aware of him. When Lois and Clark meet, Lois is surprised by how shy Clark is because she he came across as so strong and assertive in his writing.

The great part about this is that it's a situation for Lois and Clark discover each other FIRST through each other's writing and talent before they even meet.

I've always thought it would be a good thing to play with if they were to ever make another film and I'm so glad they seem to be going that route for this movie.

I also think it's worth mentioning that I think people need to keep perspective about expectations about the "rushed" nature of a love story.

Lois and Clark are in a unique position as a fictional couple. The public knows who they are and we've watched them fall in love many times already in various media properties---and many of those courting periods were very drawn out.

We just watched Clark and Lois circle each other for years on Smallville before finally being commited. They circled each other for 2 years on "Lois and Clark." They circled each other on the animated series until there was finally confirmation in the finale that Supes/Lois were going to be a "couple" of sorts. They circled each other in the comics for years before they were married etc.

Now, don't get me wrong. I LOVED the journey of Lois and Clark on Smallville. It was a slow burn that was painful at times but was totally worth it in the end. But I also know going in that a 2 hour movie going into a trilogy does not have time to do that kind of slow burn. They just don't.

At this point, I'm actually ok with the movies moving the relationship along at a quicker speed because frankly, I'm ready to actually see them together with the secret out in the open. I'm ready to get to that part and frankly, I think the public is too. The iconic nature of this relationship puts it in a unique spot in that it may be to the narrative's benefit to spend more time with them actually together and explore THAT angle going forward and all the drama that comes with it then to do a slow burn with a couple that everyone knows is going to eventually fall in love and be together.

What I'm saying is....you have to think about expectations before you get worked up at this idea of a "weak" love story and think about what that really means. Did this person go into the movie thinking that Lois wouldn't learn Clark's secret for a while? If so, then Lois learning the secret early might seem "rushed" to that person. Whereas, i'd welcome that with open arms because I'm ready and willing to get to that part of the story and just run with it.

A 2 1/2 hour movie is never going to be able to develop the Lois/Clark love story with the same detail that a TV show that ran 10 years can. It's just not possible. You are talking about 6 hours total for a possible trilogy vs. 222 hours for a 10 year TV show. And that's really ok.

All I really require from this movie to be happy with the Lois/Clark element is seeing first hand how Lois operates as a reporter and as a voice for justice, seeing Lois reach out to Superman as that voice for justice and that human link in times of turmoil, seeing Superman as this beacon of hope and good for Lois in a world where she doesn't always FINd that kind of compassion in other men. If get some variation on that...I really don't care how early she learns the secret or how quickly they are together. I won't consider it "weak" or "rushed" because this is 75 year old story and some of this, at this point, becomes short hand. I'd rather get on to the two of them having adventures together and blow precious time in a trilogy trying to do a slow burn when there just isn't enough TIME to do that. Just my opinion.